Iran Warns of Pre-Emptive Action in Nuclear Dispute

Originally posted by spy66
If Israel and the US do go a head and bomb these nuclear power plants, they will breach IAEAs resolution number 533. And set millions of peoples lives
in danger. This will make the Japanese incident seam like peanuts.

It is illegal to attack Iran's nuclear installations.

edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)

Thanks for the legal info. However, if the intentions were to not bomb then why would US invest so much resources into the potential campaign. I
doubt Resolution 533 is stopping them, it is the collateral and economic damage that they fear. How many Iranians get radioactivity is not their
concern.

Similar to rumors of US arming the Syrian rebels. As to how many hundreds of thousands die and get maimed in the potential civil war instigated by
the West, is not an issue for them. Iraq and Libya are two good examples of the 'don't give a damn' attitude of the NeoCons.

Thanks for the legal info. However, if the intentions were to not bomb then why would US invest so much resources into the potential campaign. I doubt
Resolution 533 is stopping them, it is the collateral and economic damage that they fear. How many Iranians get radioactivity is not their concern.

Personally i dont think the US is investing a lot resources into this at all. The US is not blocking Iranian ships from traveling. The air space in
and out of Iran is not blocked either. All they have done so far is agreeing on not to do business and transactions with Iran.

The odd thing about this is that the US/EU demand that Iran fallow the resolutions of IAEA, but don't need to comply to IAEA resolutions themselves.
And, its not even a topic in western media. Most people probably dont even know that our own actions are illegal according to IAEA resolutions,
because its not a topic in media.

Similar to rumors of US arming the Syrian rebels. As to how many hundreds of thousands die and get maimed in the potential civil war instigated
by the West, is not an issue for them. Iraq and Libya are two good examples of the 'don't give a damn' attitude of the NeoCons.

What has happened in Egypt, Libya and now Syria. Started 30 of June 2005 with Condoleezza Rice visit to Saudi Arabia and Egypt, where she meat with
the Muslim Brotherhood. She visited again on June 30 2007. Hillary Clinton visited Egypt and the Muslim Brotherhood on June 30 2010. In a news cast
Hillary admitted that the US was working closely with the Muslim Brotherhood. In another news cast the US admitted that they worked closely with both
Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood.

The nuclear nations of the West do comply with the NPT / IAEA. Not sure where you are getting the information they aren't, unless your just making it
up.

Secondly cooperating nations have restricted business with Iran though self imposed sanctions, which is a lawful act under international law. Blocking
access to Iran by shutting down air / land and sea traffic is an embargo and is / can be interpreted as an act of war.

The IAEA has absolutely nothing to do when it comes to hostilities between nations, so again I'm not sure where you are getting that info. The UN
charter clearly spells out the guidelines when it comes down to hostilities (Chapter
VII) up to and including this part -

Article 51

Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of
the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in
the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and
responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore
international peace and security.

4.All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political
independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

Iran needs to either comply with their treaty obligations or they need to sit down and shut up and stop threatening Israel. If they do not, countries
do not have to wait for the person pointing the gun at them to pull the trigger before taking action.

Iran can either act like an adult, or get swatted like the errant child they are.

I dont know if you have read IAEAs resolution number 533. What i am talking about is. It is illegal to attack iran's nuclear power plants. Which is
the main concern. It is also illegal to attack power plants under construction. Read IAEA resolution 533. If the west wants Iran to comply to IAEA so
should we.

I also have to add. That article 51 is also saying that we should not promote conflict that can endanger our safety. Iran sure ain't promoting but
defending. So using article 51 is basically useless. There is no threat, but a staged or manufactured one by our own policies/fear.

(a) Having considered the agenda item "Prohibition of all armed
attacks against nuclear installations devoted to peaceful purposes
whether under construction or in operation",

The key for the resolution is "peaceful purposes". That term, peaceful purposes, is repeated time and again through the entire resolution. It does NOT
prevent attacks on nuclear installations when their purpose takes on a military aspect, as is the case with Iran according the the latest IAEA
report.

Respectfully, Iran doesn't get to play both sides of the fence. They can't ignore / violate IAEA / NPT obligations and then turn around and try to
hide behind them to prevent their program from being attacked.

The ability to use the UN Charter, IAEA resolution, international law etc etc etc is incumbent on the fact that the nation seeking to use those areas
to defend itself (Iran) aren't in fact in violation of it.

IE you cant walk up to another person, punch them in the face, and then start screaming about the law when that person goes to respond.

How true they the IAEA was turned away by Iran, IAEA now has to ask why if they, Iran, are working on a bomb, were is the proof? were is the
proof they are not working on the bomb? Iran is playing a very good chess game, king to knight 7, bishop takes pawn!! not a chess player look at this
, boxing your self in www.netplaces.com... Iran is playing a very deadly game , for them
and the world. The sad thing is the People of Iran have no say.

Iran is running a stalling tactic.. Personally I think they are close to the point of no return when it comes to having enough pieces in place to
guarantee the ability of making a nuclear weapon regardless of how many of their sites are attacked / damaged / destroyed.

This first visit Iran requested the inspectors stay a few more days, while refusing them access to a military site that was declared as being part of
their program.

Iran then invites them back to discuss the outstanding issues, going so far as to send a letter to the IAEA expressing a desire to resolve outstanding
issues with no preconditions. The IAEA visits and is once again stonewalled, no answer given to the outstanding questions and Iran once again refuses
them access to a declared site.

Now Iran is inviting them back for yet another round of talks...

The talks will continue until the President gets that 3AM wake up call letting him know satellites over the Middle East have detected to tell tale
double flash in the atmosphere.

WWII demonstrated that appeasement and talking do not always work. Iran must be nipped in the bud now before they cross that line.

Hitler was a madman...
Ahmadinejad with a nuke will make Hitler's actions look like those of a choir boy.

As far as your chess quote goes I find it humorous because of its history. Persia gave us Chess, not India, and the final word in a chess match is one
Iran is familiar with -

The resolution expresses deep and increasing concern about the unresolved issues regarding the Iranian nuclear program, including those which need
to be clarified to exclude the existence of possible military dimensions. It also stresses the need for Iran and the Agency to "intensify their
dialogue" aiming at the urgent resolution of all outstanding substantive issues for the purpose of providing clarifications regarding those issues.

The resolution urges Iran once again to comply fully and without delay with its obligations under relevant resolutions of the UN Security Council, and
to meet the requirements of the IAEA Board of Governors. Expressing continuing support for a diplomatic solution, the resolution calls on Iran to
engage seriously and without preconditions in talks aimed at restoring international confidence in the exclusively peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear
program.

Refusal of Iran to comply with IAEA / NPT guidelines / requirements. The IAEA has made significant accusations against Iran and provided them a list
of concerns that Iran said they would address, which they never did.

I won't even respond to the idiot ass religion comment except to say this. That comment alone smacks of desperation on your side. It shows that when
people like you are proven wrong from failure do do proper research while also failing to understand / comprehend what it is you are
reading.

The evidence of a clandestine nuclear weapon program is present. The IAEA has been addressing that topic with Iran since the 1990's. The IAEA has
submitted a detailed list of issues that are outstanding and need to be resolved, which Iran has agreed to discuss.

The problem is Iran has backed out of that agreement on 2 occasions so far this year. Your attempt to use IAEA resolutions to justify Iranian
duplicity is just sad. Further, once called out, you then shifted gears to "wheres the proof". The IAEA has submitted the proof to Iran to receive
answers, and to date have received NONE.

Iran is in breach of IAEA / NPT requirements by refusing to disclose locations of nuclear facilities BEFORE construction begins. They refuse to allow
inspectors to visit declared nuclear locations as required under IAEA guidelines. They are working on a ballistic missile capable of carrying a
nuclear payload in violation of NPT treaties.

All of the cards on on the table, except for Iran's. They apparently realized they are holding a crap hand and are now trying to change the game from
High stakes poker to go fish while quietly trying to pull their bet off the table so they don't lose it.

My knowledge on this topic is apparently more considerable than yours. You didn't know what IAEA resolution 553 was referring to until, I pointed it
out to you. You demand proof, and i've linked that because apparently you either missed the info or just ignored it because it doesn't support your
position. Either way, you didn't use it in your posts.

Now that your excuses / Iranian apologies have been shot down, with proof / links / sources that I highly encourage you to read (because its evident
you have not), what excuse are you going to use next?

right so you sign the npt treaty, the first pillar npt.. second disarmament, to get the third pillar: harmless nuclear energy..But he we can use some
centrifuges for enrichment for nuclear warheads and others not, that makes the npt so credible right!
imho that's what's so dangerous about the third pillar of the npt, the support for facilitating nuclear energy and building these complexes( for these
regimes)..they also call it the archillis heel of the npt. Its north Korea all over again.

p.s.The reactor at bushehr is a light water reactor , not a breeder, so they can't produce weapon grade plutonium there

The IR-40 is connected to the electrical grid, however based on Iran's needs its an overkill. There are light water reactors with improved technology
that are more efficient and less maintenance than the IR-40 they are building / using now.

The only reason to use that type of a plant is for the Plutonium. That plant will generate 20-25 pounds of plutonium a year. According to the info
enough for 2 nuclear bombs.

Darkhovin Nuclear Power Plant(Khouzestan Province) Darkhovin I - Reactor System: IR-360 (PWR), a domestically developed 360 MWe NPP, as of 2010, the
basic design has been finished and the works on the detailed design of the system has been started by the Iranian experts. Complementary Checks is to
be done by the European incorporations. Primary construction works is to be started soon.

You are still not showing any factual proof that Iran is actually trying to build nuclear weapons. Just because IAEA ain't allowed to inspect some of
Iran's military assets dosent mean they are hiding nuclear technology. Iran might be wanting to hide some other aspects of their military technology.
Or maybe Iran just wants to protect their scientists. They seam to go missing after IAEA has been talking to them.

* - concentration of 0.9% to 2% - Heavy Water reactors us this enrichment level.
* - Light water reactors require - 3% - 5% enrichment
* - Research reactors require 12% and can run as high as 19.75% on the far end, which is below the enrichment levels of 20%, which is the level Iran
enriches to.

The reason that concerns people - Its classified as highly enriched. 20% enrichment is enough for a nuclear weapon. There is no legitimate reason for
Iran to be enriching to the 20% level.

Highly enriched uranium (HEU) has a greater than 20% concentration of 235U or 233U. The fissile uranium in nuclear weapons usually contains 85% or
more of 235U known as weapon(s)-grade, though for a crude, inefficient weapon 20% is sufficient (called weapon(s)-usable);[2][3] some argue that even
less is sufficient[citation needed], but then the critical mass for unmoderated fast neutrons rapidly increases, approaching infinity at 6%235U.[4]
For critical experiments, enrichment of uranium to over 97% has been accomplished.[5]

I'm afraid I'm not missing the point, I'm also not assuming they are building nuclear weapons just because they are at the 20% threshold. I
understand what you are saying for their power concerns, but, they have also claimed they are using it for medical research no? Until I see actual
evidence (not conjecture or speculation or opinions) I will believe them that they are enriching for medical/power use. There is nothing wrong with
them enriching their own uranium rather than buying it.

HEU is also used in fast neutron reactors, whose cores require about 20% or more of fissile material, as well as in naval reactors, where it often
contains at least 50% 235U, but typically does not exceed 90%. The Fermi-1 commercial fast reactor prototype used HEU with 26.5% 235U. Significant
quantities of HEU are used in the production of medical isotopes, for example molybdenum-99 for technetium-99m generators.[7]

Above from earlier link. Underlined was to let people who refuse to read, know what is said on the page.

what if it is on line and they can produce 75% now , that is not too far from 90% weapons grade now is it, lets say in 3 months time they Iran
could have 6 nukes, one on Israel 3 on the US 2 just to have 2, and then say "we have nukes? HA HA we can not make weapons grade!!!, come see." so
then IAEA is let in and they prove Iran did not have 90% capability but has 75%. Queens bishop takes kings pawn, kings rook takes Queen, check mate
in 2 moves

I have to ask did you even read what you posted? For it says 20% is weapons usable, crude but usable, form your post i put in bold

Highly
enriched uranium (HEU)

Highly enriched uranium (HEU) has a greater than 20% concentration of 235U or 233U. The fissile uranium in nuclear weapons usually contains 85% or
more of 235U known as weapon(s)-grade, though for a crude, inefficient weapon 20% is sufficient (called weapon(s)-usable);[2][3] some argue that
even less is sufficient[citation needed], but then the critical mass for unmoderated fast neutrons rapidly increases, approaching infinity at
6%235U.[4] For critical experiments, enrichment of uranium to over 97% has been accomplished.[5] and some wonder why they held their breath at the
first bomb test.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.